Smasharoo wrote:
I would rather see them have a term, but other than that, appoint rather than elect.
I'm not so sure. It'd have to be a fairly long term. A shorter term opens issues of quid pro quo for their post judicial career.
I agree, something like 20 years. I don't know, it's probably a personal bias on my part but the idea of indefinitely has never sat well with me. Yes, I realize everyone dies, but I'm just not so keen on the "I'll stay on my throne long after I'm senile and you can drag my corpse out" feel I get from the current set up. I also feel, perhaps erroneously since I admit I'm not the most politically savvy person every, that "forever" appointments give too much judicial influence to the executive branch.
Nexa